The missing COVID virus\u2014answering critics\u2019 objections<\/h2>\n\nBy Jon Rappoport<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/corona-1603757523279.jpg\")
<\/p>\n
For months, I\u2019ve been providing evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has not been proven to exist.<\/p>\n
Several recent objections to my analysis have been brought forward.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m not interested in mentioning names or getting into disputes with people who might otherwise be doing important work.<\/p>\n
One objection that\u2019s been raised: a key CDC document<\/a> [1] I quoted<\/a> [2], which openly admitted that the virus was \u201cnot available,\u201d was not really published in July of this year. It was reprinted or updated in July; it was originally published in February, when presumably, the CDC might have had a problem obtaining isolated virus.<\/p>\nReally? The \u201cpandemic\u201d was already underway in February. The CDC, one of the two most powerful public health agencies in the world, couldn\u2019t get isolated virus then\u2014couldn\u2019t get it anywhere. In other words, there was a declared pandemic without a proven virus.<\/p>\n
That is a damning fact. I don\u2019t care whether it was February or July. If the CDC couldn\u2019t get the virus, no one had it.<\/p>\n
No one had it, because no one had isolated it. Researchers simply assumed it existed.<\/p>\n
Not only that, the CDC document [1] [2] in which the agency admitted the virus was \u201cnot available\u201d was a long article describing how to perform the PCR test for the virus. What virus? The one that wasn\u2019t there?<\/p>\n
You put together a test procedure that will change the fate of humanity, but you don\u2019t have the item the procedure is supposed to detect. This is permissible? This is excusable? Not unless science is fairy tales.<\/p>\n
A few superficial critics of my work should also realize this CDC document is far from my only evidence showing the virus hasn\u2019t been isolated. They should read all my articles on the subject.<\/p>\n
Another objection to my analysis: labs do, in fact, have isolated virus in the form of \u201cviral stocks.\u201d<\/p>\n
But what does that phrase mean? It means SOUP. In dishes, in labs, researchers assume they have virus mixed with cells, mixed with chemicals and drugs and who knows what else. If this is \u201cisolation,\u201d a rabbit is a spaceship.<\/p>\n
Further, it is claimed, because some of those cells\u2014monkey cells\u2014die in the dish in the lab, this means the virus is there and is doing the killing.<\/p>\n
Nonsense. First of all, the cells are being starved of nutrients. Second, they\u2019re open to being poisoned by the drugs and chemicals in the soup. The presumption of the virus doing the killing is unwarranted and absurd. [3] [4] [5]<\/p>\n
The third objection to my analysis: researchers can assemble the PCR test without actually having the virus. They can substitute \u201csynthetic RNA\u201d which is a close match to the virus.<\/p>\n
I see. And they know the synthetic RNA is a close match to the missing virus exactly how? Answer: they don\u2019t know. They assume. They pretend. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]<\/p>\n
This would be like saying: \u201cAhem. There is an unknown planet in our solar system. We haven\u2019t seen it, we don\u2019t know where it is, we don\u2019t know what it looks like, but we do know the moon is a very close version of the unknown planet. Therefore, we can use everything we know about the moon to infer a precise description of the unknown planet.\u201d<\/p>\n
This kind of tap-dancing might win you a prize at a junior high school variety show, but it has nothing to do with science.<\/p>\n
For those who want to further explore the core issue of the existence of the virus\u2014e.g., medical professionals, who have large gaps and blind sports in their understanding\u2014I STRONGLY suggest accessing the work of Dr. Andrew Kaufman [12] and Dr. Tom Cowan [13].<\/p>\n
I understand that some people who are very much opposed to the lockdowns and the economic destruction want to keep the argument along the channels of: the deceptive PCR test; the false case and death numbers; the dangerous vaccine; the ripping away of Constitutional and natural freedoms.<\/p>\n
Anyone who has been reading my more than 200 articles about COVID [14] knows I\u2019ve been tackling those issues since the beginning. But the existence of the virus is not merely a distraction. It\u2019s at the starting gate of the whole effort to initiate new levels of enslavement for all humans. It can\u2019t be brushed aside.<\/p>\n
It would be foolish of me to criticize people who are otherwise doing very important work to stem the tide of the technocratic takeover of Earth, simply because they aren\u2019t addressing the existence of the virus.<\/p>\n
If a few of them want to criticize me, fine. I\u2019ve been around the block more times than I can count. It\u2019s not a problem. I\u2019d suggest, though, they do more than a dip a toe into the water of the stupendous virus-fraud.<\/p>\n
And don\u2019t try the tactic of accusing me of \u201cconfusing people about the pandemic.\u201d That is not a standard for measuring veracity. It\u2019s actually a low-level con. When two sides disagree, proponents of one side assert the other side is sowing confusion. Baloney. The confusion, in this case, is inherent in the conventional view of virus-isolation and proof of discovery.<\/p>\n
One disease one germ, a thousand diseases a thousand germs\u2014this lock-step ironclad pharmaceutical propaganda of more than a century has caused monstrous harm. It\u2019s time to end the madness.<\/p>\n
We don\u2019t need unanimity on every issue. But we do need a measure of good will and decency. I\u2019m glad to report that, with only a few exceptions, this is what I find.<\/p>\n
Coda: Blithely accepting the existence of the virus puts people on a slippery slope. From that point on, they may accept at least partial anti-human \u201ccontainment measures.\u201d Lockdowns under certain circumstances, some mask wearing, some distancing, some restrictions on the size and nature of gatherings, some isolation from loved ones, some tracing, some testing. Before they know it, they\u2019re dealing from a position of weakness and compromise: \u201cI agree that a certain amount of destruction is necessary, but not as much destruction as Fauci wants\u2026\u201d On moral, spiritual, strategic, political, economic, and scientific grounds, that\u2019s disastrous.<\/p>\n
Now, as a backgrounder, here is my article about Dr. Tom Cowan\u2019s recent exploration of the COVID virus invented out of sheer nonsense: [5]<\/p>\n
Dr. Tom Cowan explores the COVID virus invented out of sheer nonsense<\/em><\/p>\n\u2014Dr. Cowan analyzes yet another key document posted by the CDC, in their journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases: \u201cSevere Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States\u201d\u2014<\/em><\/p>\nby Jon Rappoport<\/p>\n
October 19, 2020<\/p>\n
The hits keep coming. The CDC used an arbitrary computer \u201ctinker-toy\u201d process to invent a description of the virus. The virus that no one has proven exists. This is the basic conclusion of Dr. Tom Cowan.<\/p>\n
The CDC article<\/a> [3] was discovered by Sally Fallon Morrell. Her co-author, Dr. Cowan, fleshes out the fraud. Cowan\u2019s article is titled, \u201cOnly Poisoned Monkey Cells \u2018Grew\u2019 the \u2018Virus\u2019.\u201d<\/em><\/a> [4] [5]<\/p>\nDr. Cowan: \u201c[The CDC journal article] was published in June 2020 [original publication, March 2020]. The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research. A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cFirst, in the section titled \u2018Whole Genome Sequencing,\u2019 we find that rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end, they found 37 base pairs from unpurified samples using PCR probes. This means they actually looked at 37 out of the approximately 30,000 of the base pairs that are claimed to be the genome of the intact virus. They then took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs.\u201d<\/p>\n
In other words, the sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was done by assumption and arbitrary inference. If this is science, a penguin is a spaceship.<\/p>\n
Cowan: \u201cTo me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn\u2019s hair, hooves and horn.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by \u2018consensus,\u2019 sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary \u2018unicorn,\u2019 so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn.\u201d<\/p>\n
By Jon Rappoport<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
For months, I\u2019ve been providing evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus has not been proven to exist.<\/p>\n
Several recent objections to my analysis have been brought forward.<\/p>\n
I\u2019m not interested in mentioning names or getting into disputes with people who might otherwise be doing important work.<\/p>\n
One objection that\u2019s been raised: a key CDC document<\/a> [1] I quoted<\/a> [2], which openly admitted that the virus was \u201cnot available,\u201d was not really published in July of this year. It was reprinted or updated in July; it was originally published in February, when presumably, the CDC might have had a problem obtaining isolated virus.<\/p>\n Really? The \u201cpandemic\u201d was already underway in February. The CDC, one of the two most powerful public health agencies in the world, couldn\u2019t get isolated virus then\u2014couldn\u2019t get it anywhere. In other words, there was a declared pandemic without a proven virus.<\/p>\n That is a damning fact. I don\u2019t care whether it was February or July. If the CDC couldn\u2019t get the virus, no one had it.<\/p>\n No one had it, because no one had isolated it. Researchers simply assumed it existed.<\/p>\n Not only that, the CDC document [1] [2] in which the agency admitted the virus was \u201cnot available\u201d was a long article describing how to perform the PCR test for the virus. What virus? The one that wasn\u2019t there?<\/p>\n You put together a test procedure that will change the fate of humanity, but you don\u2019t have the item the procedure is supposed to detect. This is permissible? This is excusable? Not unless science is fairy tales.<\/p>\n A few superficial critics of my work should also realize this CDC document is far from my only evidence showing the virus hasn\u2019t been isolated. They should read all my articles on the subject.<\/p>\n Another objection to my analysis: labs do, in fact, have isolated virus in the form of \u201cviral stocks.\u201d<\/p>\n But what does that phrase mean? It means SOUP. In dishes, in labs, researchers assume they have virus mixed with cells, mixed with chemicals and drugs and who knows what else. If this is \u201cisolation,\u201d a rabbit is a spaceship.<\/p>\n Further, it is claimed, because some of those cells\u2014monkey cells\u2014die in the dish in the lab, this means the virus is there and is doing the killing.<\/p>\n Nonsense. First of all, the cells are being starved of nutrients. Second, they\u2019re open to being poisoned by the drugs and chemicals in the soup. The presumption of the virus doing the killing is unwarranted and absurd. [3] [4] [5]<\/p>\n The third objection to my analysis: researchers can assemble the PCR test without actually having the virus. They can substitute \u201csynthetic RNA\u201d which is a close match to the virus.<\/p>\n I see. And they know the synthetic RNA is a close match to the missing virus exactly how? Answer: they don\u2019t know. They assume. They pretend. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]<\/p>\n This would be like saying: \u201cAhem. There is an unknown planet in our solar system. We haven\u2019t seen it, we don\u2019t know where it is, we don\u2019t know what it looks like, but we do know the moon is a very close version of the unknown planet. Therefore, we can use everything we know about the moon to infer a precise description of the unknown planet.\u201d<\/p>\n This kind of tap-dancing might win you a prize at a junior high school variety show, but it has nothing to do with science.<\/p>\n For those who want to further explore the core issue of the existence of the virus\u2014e.g., medical professionals, who have large gaps and blind sports in their understanding\u2014I STRONGLY suggest accessing the work of Dr. Andrew Kaufman [12] and Dr. Tom Cowan [13].<\/p>\n I understand that some people who are very much opposed to the lockdowns and the economic destruction want to keep the argument along the channels of: the deceptive PCR test; the false case and death numbers; the dangerous vaccine; the ripping away of Constitutional and natural freedoms.<\/p>\n Anyone who has been reading my more than 200 articles about COVID [14] knows I\u2019ve been tackling those issues since the beginning. But the existence of the virus is not merely a distraction. It\u2019s at the starting gate of the whole effort to initiate new levels of enslavement for all humans. It can\u2019t be brushed aside.<\/p>\n It would be foolish of me to criticize people who are otherwise doing very important work to stem the tide of the technocratic takeover of Earth, simply because they aren\u2019t addressing the existence of the virus.<\/p>\n If a few of them want to criticize me, fine. I\u2019ve been around the block more times than I can count. It\u2019s not a problem. I\u2019d suggest, though, they do more than a dip a toe into the water of the stupendous virus-fraud.<\/p>\n And don\u2019t try the tactic of accusing me of \u201cconfusing people about the pandemic.\u201d That is not a standard for measuring veracity. It\u2019s actually a low-level con. When two sides disagree, proponents of one side assert the other side is sowing confusion. Baloney. The confusion, in this case, is inherent in the conventional view of virus-isolation and proof of discovery.<\/p>\n One disease one germ, a thousand diseases a thousand germs\u2014this lock-step ironclad pharmaceutical propaganda of more than a century has caused monstrous harm. It\u2019s time to end the madness.<\/p>\n We don\u2019t need unanimity on every issue. But we do need a measure of good will and decency. I\u2019m glad to report that, with only a few exceptions, this is what I find.<\/p>\n Coda: Blithely accepting the existence of the virus puts people on a slippery slope. From that point on, they may accept at least partial anti-human \u201ccontainment measures.\u201d Lockdowns under certain circumstances, some mask wearing, some distancing, some restrictions on the size and nature of gatherings, some isolation from loved ones, some tracing, some testing. Before they know it, they\u2019re dealing from a position of weakness and compromise: \u201cI agree that a certain amount of destruction is necessary, but not as much destruction as Fauci wants\u2026\u201d On moral, spiritual, strategic, political, economic, and scientific grounds, that\u2019s disastrous.<\/p>\n Now, as a backgrounder, here is my article about Dr. Tom Cowan\u2019s recent exploration of the COVID virus invented out of sheer nonsense: [5]<\/p>\n Dr. Tom Cowan explores the COVID virus invented out of sheer nonsense<\/em><\/p>\n \u2014Dr. Cowan analyzes yet another key document posted by the CDC, in their journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases: \u201cSevere Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 from Patient with Coronavirus Disease, United States\u201d\u2014<\/em><\/p>\n by Jon Rappoport<\/p>\n October 19, 2020<\/p>\n The hits keep coming. The CDC used an arbitrary computer \u201ctinker-toy\u201d process to invent a description of the virus. The virus that no one has proven exists. This is the basic conclusion of Dr. Tom Cowan.<\/p>\n The CDC article<\/a> [3] was discovered by Sally Fallon Morrell. Her co-author, Dr. Cowan, fleshes out the fraud. Cowan\u2019s article is titled, \u201cOnly Poisoned Monkey Cells \u2018Grew\u2019 the \u2018Virus\u2019.\u201d<\/em><\/a> [4] [5]<\/p>\n Dr. Cowan: \u201c[The CDC journal article] was published in June 2020 [original publication, March 2020]. The purpose of the article was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research. A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cFirst, in the section titled \u2018Whole Genome Sequencing,\u2019 we find that rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end, they found 37 base pairs from unpurified samples using PCR probes. This means they actually looked at 37 out of the approximately 30,000 of the base pairs that are claimed to be the genome of the intact virus. They then took these 37 segments and put them into a computer program, which filled in the rest of the base pairs.\u201d<\/p>\n In other words, the sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was done by assumption and arbitrary inference. If this is science, a penguin is a spaceship.<\/p>\n Cowan: \u201cTo me, this computer-generation step constitutes scientific fraud. Here is an equivalency: A group of researchers claim to have found a unicorn because they found a piece of a hoof, a hair from a tail, and a snippet of a horn. They then add that information into a computer and program it to re-create the unicorn, and they then claim this computer re-creation is the real unicorn. Of course, they had never actually seen a unicorn so could not possibly have examined its genetic makeup to compare their samples with the actual unicorn\u2019s hair, hooves and horn.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe researchers claim they decided which is the real genome of SARS-CoV-2 by \u2018consensus,\u2019 sort of like a vote. Again, different computer programs will come up with different versions of the imaginary \u2018unicorn,\u2019 so they come together as a group and decide which is the real imaginary unicorn.\u201d<\/p>\n